Don't Open Carry

[Dalendenver]

BTW: Bare means not covered.
Bear: To carry (or large furry animal)
Bear Arms

I think we should just arm bears.

[theGinsue]

Ed, you're wrong.

While I have never OC'd, this is a RIGHT that wew will not be bullied away from.

Just as with CCW, OC requires discretion, common sense, a knowledge of and desire to obey the law.

Before you come into a site like this and spout off BS like that, perhaps you should check out the different threads and get a feel for the people on the site. One of the most important traits of a good communicator is to know your audience.

[KevDen2005]

I am going to go way out on a limb here...

Open carry makes you look crazy. There, I said it. If it becomes a movement, and maybe it already has, it is going to hurt our cause (i.e., the right to keep and bare arms) more than it will help.

Before you jump down my throat (since I am new here and mostly an unknown), I AM NOT an anti-gun guy. I possess a concealed weapons permit and often carry a concealed handgun (Kahr PM)

So please sound off. Who is crazy - me or the guy with the firearm hanging from his belt in the Safeway parking lot.

I am going out on a limb here, but who the f*@& is this guy?

Sell your anti-gun agenda somewhere else!

[KevDen2005]

I think we should just arm bears.

I take back everything I said and now agree with this post

[GreenScoutII]

I guess I can see both sides of this arguement:

On one hand, open carry in certain settings is likely to attract unwanted attention and cause the carrier some unwanted headaches, even though he is just exercising his constitutional right.

On the other hand, not exercising a right is a quick way to lose it IMHO.

Personally, I seldom open carry. Usually the only time I do is in an outdoors setting with few other people around. Think night fishing for catfish for example. A few years ago I took my wife and her sister down to Brush Hollow to do some fishing at night. I've always had good luck there with nightcrawlers. Catfish get hungry for a midnight snack. Anyway, my wife decided to go back to the truck for something and I had kind of an uneasy feeling. I went to check on her and there were three guys, obviously drunk, who I saw aproaching. In a very friendly voice I said, "Hey guys, having any luck?". They were mumbling something under their breath between themselves. I turned in such a way that my .45 was visible on my hip. I made no move toward it, nor was I in any way agressive to the three "gentlemen". I just wanted to let them know, via non-verbal communication, that attempting anything nefarious was not going to end well for them. Even drunk as they were, they got the idea and left.

I can't say for sure they were up to something as they never did make an agressive move toward my wife, but I had a real uneasy gut feeling about them. Had I not shown up to check on my wife and had I not had my pistol on my hip, it might have been a different situation entirely. The Sig apparantly has excellent deterrent value.

The other side of this equation is that, as a big guy, sometimes I accidentally intimidate people. I'm a plumber who does mostly new construction. As such, frequently I'm dressed for the job site while out in public. I can look a little "rough". If I were to open carry in public day to day, I'm highly likely to really scare somebody. I have no desire to come off as some crazy guy. With my luck, some anti gunner would snap a photo of me in torn Carhart jeans, sleeveless T shirt, steel toe boots, bald head, and goatee and use this photo as a way to paint us all as loonies.

I guess my point is both open and concealed carry have their place. I think its best to use discretion and decide which is appropriate for the situation and environment.

[Elhuero]

edjobsman, two points for effort on your trolling.

You do, however, need more practice if you are to reach the level of trolling LeJerk brought us in the "To the user with the offending avatar" thread.

[Irving]

I knew a guy that claimed to be tackled by police and guns pointed at him for open carrying. Except he wasn't actually open carrying. His gun was locked in his trunk. He was only wearing an empty holster. He probably looked pretty thuggish, but still.

[Elhuero]

I knew a guy that claimed to be tackled by police and guns pointed at him for open carrying. Except he wasn't actually open carrying. His gun was locked in his trunk. He was only wearing an empty holster. He probably looked pretty thuggish, but still.

I wish I could go to the lengths the police do to make themselves feel safe

[edjobsman]

I would like to give you an example of how I think open carry may actually be hurting our cause. Starbucks, as you know, recently announced that it would allow open carry in its shops. They said that not doing so would mean they would be preventing law abiding citizens from entering their establishments. Why would a liberal company like SB allow open carry in its shops if it didn’t have an ulterior motive (if you don’t think SB is liberal, just goggle “Starbucks and liberal and also check out http://www.sptimes.com/2005/03/25/Bu..._steam.shtml)? In my opinion this company is trying to encourage open carry because it thinks it has found a way to highlight a fringe element in our society that needs more negative attention focused on it (Note: I do not believe open carry is a fringe activity, but I do believe SB does). SB thinks this negative attention is going to advance their liberal agenda. I believe SB may be trying to lure open carry folks into their shops for the sole purpose of making law abiding citizens look like loonies in the eyes of an already hoplophobic society.

The practice of liberals flaunting guns or encouraging others to do so in order to promote this hoplophoia does not end with SB. Look at all the liberal film directors and actors who support anti-gun causes yet make movies depicting firearms solely as instruments of death and mayhem. When is the last time you saw a Hollywood production about skeet shooting or a CMP-sponsored junior's shooting event?


I am not trying to denigrate those of you who want to open carry. If the law allows it, then by all means do it. In truth, though, conversations about current laws regarding open carry don’t really interest me. Whether open carry is against the law or granted by the law is not my concern. The consequences of our actions, however, should be everyone’s concern. Many open carry folks want to be provocative. They want to make it absolutely clear, in no uncertain terms, that carrying openly is their right. Some do this responsibly (e.g., through eduction, etc.) but others do it an in-your-face manner. I am just not sure an in-your-face attitude is what we need.

I have been reading forums like the Colorado AR-15 Shooters for some time now. Even though I am not a friend of anyone in the group, that I know of, I think I know my audience pretty well. I obviously knew my voice was one that would not be completely welcome here, but I believe the conversation about open carry is one that we need to have. Where do we really expect to go with this practice? I have to admit that it is heartening to hear anecdotes suggesting that most people witnessing open carry don’t really care. I am not saying that it must stop; I am saying that we need to look at the consequences down the road. Do we really want the shit to hit the fan at some point? Is that the goal here?

The old west practice of carrying a sidearm or a carbine into saloon or general store (I have to admit that would be a hoot) came to an end shortly after the turn of the century (in most places) because of the polices of shop and bar keepers, and eventually towns, municipalities, and states. In municipalities where open carry is still generally accepted, I honestly cannot think of an argument against it. If folks are used to seeing it and it is a generally accepted practice, then open carry to your heart’s content. But at starbucks, or in areas where you know the general public looks down on it, shouldn’t we think twice about what we are doing? Shouldn’t we think about the statement we are inadvertently communicating in support of the anti-gun left and in conflict with our true gun ownership causes? It would be nice if that statement were always interpreted as, “what you see here is me exercising my constitutionally granted right and I am proud to live a land where I can carry my firearm openly and I hope you are proud of it too”, but that, unfortunately is rarely the way the gun-fearing public sees it.

With that I will say this: You guys and gals who open carry are on the front lines. A part of me is proud of you and part of me thinks that I should be more supportive. Please don’t see me as an enemy. Keep up the good work. I know most of you are responsible in all respects and I applaud you for your efforts.
Cheers!

[Irving]

I read your rebuttal and what comes to mind is this thought. "Just because you're gay, doesn't mean you should have a parade about it."

I agree that there is a difference between doing something, and doing something to purposely make a big deal about it.